I liked the first one, that was omitted from the final list. We should have permanent rainbows on the Thames. It's quite nice to have a bridge that really is a bridge and is being paid for by the private sector. What a radical idea.

“Westminster City Council does not support the proposal and our officers have, and continue to express strongly the Council’s opposition to the proposed bridge, on the grounds of its visual and environmental impact including the impact that a new bridge would have at a landing site in Westminster, on traffic flows, pedestrian movement and on residential amenity.”

In particular, they're objecting to the effect of the plan because of "strong concerns about the damaging impact that the proposed bridge would have on Pimlico’s last remaining piece of public open space by the river."

Is it too late to hope that Lambeth Council take a similar view on the proposed Garden Bridge/taxpayer subsidised private tourist attraction?

So Westminster City Council is strongly opposed to the bridge on the grounds of its visual and environmental impact.
It is hypocrisy of the highest degree when viewed with their decision on the Garden Bridge

So Westminster City Council is strongly opposed to the bridge on the grounds of its visual and environmental impact.
It is hypocrisy of the highest degree when viewed with their decision on the Garden Bridge

Still seems to be going ahead though. Maybe they just express opposition in order not to be seen to support every project indiscriminately, knowing very well it wil go ahead anyway? I am neutral on the garden bridge, but I am quite cynical with regards to the "youth board" , which includes the Oasis Academy, who recently received a "glowing Ofsted report".